How so? This creates exclusivity where only the rich can become lawyers.

Not true at all. I'm not even in the ballpark of being rich (certainly wasn't prior to law school either). I might owe my ass to Uncle Sam for my education, but wealth is not a prerequisite to obtaining the education.

Thu Dec 29, 2011 11:32 am

the meanCertified O.G.

Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 6503
Location: philly/sacto/kauai/ohio

I know now all the secrets:

Thu May 03, 2012 12:53 pm

GrantherBirdlyD&D addict

Joined: 05 Jun 2004
Posts: 3145

the mean wrote: I know now all the secrets:

Did you become a judge? If so, congrats!

Thu May 03, 2012 1:04 pm

wesfau

Joined: 22 Mar 2005
Posts: 705

the mean wrote: I know now all the secrets:

Wow, congrats!

You are now the Honorable Mean.

Can you get me into a meeting of the Star Chamber?

Thu May 03, 2012 1:14 pm

Captiv8

Joined: 25 Aug 2006
Posts: 8546
Location: Third Coast

Cut off that nose and you are Voldemort. Congrats man.

Thu May 03, 2012 2:36 pm

the meanCertified O.G.

Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 6503
Location: philly/sacto/kauai/ohio

I'm just an acting judge. Meaning I sit in when the judge is on vacation. I may run in the future, though.

Thu May 03, 2012 2:48 pm

Sage FrancisSelf Fighteous

Joined: 30 Jun 2002
Posts: 21737

"This guy has a court date and instead of going in and acting respectful, he decides to take his video camera and try out all the First Amendment stuff he’s been reading on the internet."

Thoughts? I found it funny just because of how it all played out, but I don't think it's right how we're forced to fall into (an ambiguous) line or else face violence.

Tue Sep 18, 2012 5:18 pm

the meanCertified O.G.

Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 6503
Location: philly/sacto/kauai/ohio

Well, the fact that he got that far with a camera means there was no metal detector at the court house (common for smaller county courts.) Dude was acting aggressive and being a dick. Security dudes would be worried about dumbass having a weapon.

Tazing may have happened a bit early, and the battery counts are a little much, but yeah...

Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:50 pm

phataccino

Joined: 10 Jan 2004
Posts: 4781

Congrats, Mean! I hope you do make a run for judge in the future. I was considering throwing my hat into the ring for a seat on the county Board of Commissioners last year, but took a job that I was offered instead. I was communications director for a friend who ran, though. Local politics can be nutty.

Wed Sep 19, 2012 9:24 pm

Jack

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Posts: 683

Sage Francis wrote: "This guy has a court date and instead of going in and acting respectful, he decides to take his video camera and try out all the First Amendment stuff he’s been reading on the internet."

Thoughts? I found it funny just because of how it all played out, but I don't think it's right how we're forced to fall into (an ambiguous) line or else face violence.

oh man that is great

Wed Sep 19, 2012 10:37 pm

DeadAwake

Joined: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 596
Location: Aus.

Seeing as this thread has been ressurected once more, i thought i would bring to your attention the Youtube Movie Ungrip. Its 1 hour and 10 minutes, but well worth the watch if you harbour any interest in this movement.

Just type "Ungrip" on youtube.

Its about how a Canadian man divorced himself from the government. He aqcuired land, built on it and drives licenseless without being harassed from the authorities. He acquired a full set of volumes of legal dictionaries, studied their meanings, rebuked particular laws & leglislation and has become a sovereign.

Thu Sep 20, 2012 4:16 am

Captiv8

Joined: 25 Aug 2006
Posts: 8546
Location: Third Coast

Does he own the land completely, as in fee simple absolute? It would be truly impressive if he does. I don't really understand the no license thing though. Is he rejecting it as a government tendril, wrapping around his soul and drawing him into the machine?

Thu Sep 20, 2012 4:47 am

Captiv8

Joined: 25 Aug 2006
Posts: 8546
Location: Third Coast

Also, I think that sovereignty at the individual level is a load of shit. No man is an island, and all that. Communal sovereignty is far more pressing, important, and sustainable than one man against the evil government that demands a driver's license and taxes. Rally a community. Otherwise your individual action, while admirable, is ultimately worthless. Which is to say, this should be the free community movement, as a person is only as strong as the peers among which they commune.

Fri Sep 21, 2012 7:06 pm

DeadAwake

Joined: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 596
Location: Aus.

The main theme of the video is that government is based on consent. And that we have a choice as to what we may give consent.

A quote from the Declaration of Independence that was pointed out is "Governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

Normally person is defined as a human being regarded as an individual. In law, he said, it is defined as an individual or incorporated group having certain rights and responsibilities. To further segregate there is a "natural person" and an "artificial person". Apparently in the volumes of legal terms there are 250 pages dedicated to defining person in all different situations/instances.

He bought the land and then destroyed all the indentity documents and underwent a process of divorcing himself from the government. I dont what exactly that entailed except the destruction of those documents (drivers license, birth certificate, ID). As these documents are a form of consent to being governed in a specific area of life.

Actually, im not sure about the land. But i assume he bought it, then destroyed his citizenship/underwent the aforementioned process. He started to build on the land and received a letter asking the him and his partner to cease building until a building permit was filled out. He didnt do this as these documents give consent to being governed. So he responded accordingly, asking them to provide a proof of claim that he must follow guidelines from the municipality act. A tax assessor was dispatched onto his property and he asked if the tax assessor was a agent of the county, which he was. He asked the agent which parts of the act his authority came from, which he told him. He told the assessor he will get back to him after he reads the documents and get back to him, which the tax assessor complied with. He found the act, which said he must be notified X amount of time in advance and that no one had permission to be on his property without his consent. These were grounds for law suits (trespassing and breach of act). A minister replied saying he had good points and to take it up with the county who havent replied to him since.

About the license he says, a vehicle or any registered item is considered public. As soon as you are part of a/the public, you are assumed to need protection from others & yourself. So yeah, a tendril constricting his being and drawing him into the machine.

An interesting point was that the Magna Carta is the basis for human rights and law for any colony under the crown. King John who was at war went to the Pope at the time for assistance in his battles and signed over the Kingdom of England to the Pope for the aid. But he was under duress (knife point) when he signed the Magna Carta, which technically makes the legal contract invalid.

He also talks about militairy connotations in the legal system. Governor General, Lieutenant Governor, Solicitor General, commission & Officer are all such titles/terms. He also said that a tax payer is an officer who holds an office. When you work for a commission under a social insurance number you are a commissioned officer. This is all done under Admiralty law, which is militairy in nature.

So when you turn the responsible age and work under a social insurance # or accept a birth certificate you accept being dispatched to a militairy post, as evidenced by name, address and date of birth. Which implies citizens are at war. This guy was in Canada so of course all the laws/terms are for there.

In the Interpretation Act for Canada, Canada is defined as : "Canada, for greater certainty, includes the internal waters of Canada and its territorial sea". Meaning Canada is just water! So Citizenship is a vessel of consent to government & protection.

I paraphrased this from notes i wrote from the video. All credit from that goes to Robert Paige. If any of that interests you, you should check out the video about him, which i mentioned in my last post.

There are some holes which leave some grey areas from it, but i guess one would have to research law to understand it better.

About land, to me owning land is an outlandish concept. Land is borrowed. "It was here before you were, itll be here in the future." Unless we are an alien race, we were created from the Earth. So owning it or parts of it dont make sense. It is borrowed. In fact id say the Earth owns us, in a more objective sense. This quote says it all:

"The first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought himself of saying This is mine, and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not anyone have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows, "Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody." ~Jean Jacques Rousseau, A Discourse on the Origin of

Sun Sep 23, 2012 7:34 am

DeadAwake

Joined: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 596
Location: Aus.

I think self-governance, individual sovereignty is the only we kind we can have and must develop before we should even think about communal sovereignty. Though i guess we may have to compromise since we are immersed in communal activity and relations.

As long as every persons conduct is founded on a real conscience, im all for co-independence. Co-operative independence. Not everyone would govern themselves according to that, but i believe the majority are capable and will if the circumstances pushed it. If people were aware of their options. If everyone rejected taking up arms and being sent to foreign countries, that matter would be settled. Through self-sovereignty.

Its about taking responsibility for our own actions, which some people want to eschew. Or if not, we do so unconsciously through being governed by a small group of people.

"a person is only as strong as the peers among which they commune."... True. Conversely, a community is made up of individuals. I raise you a "A chain is only as strong as its weakest link." Gotta bring your best to the communitay. Kinda paradoxical, but there it is.